Away Chicago Bulls Friday, April 11, 2014

That must have been the hidden agenda, play Singler at key times to assure that we were in position to get the draft pick, thanks coach, the best thing you have done since you took over for Cheeks..

Have to agree with you here. Take that praise above away from Loyer.... Drummond, Monroe and Jennings minutes should be limited the last five games to give them more rest for summer vacation activities and Gigi and Mitchell should have played more to see if they were worth bringing to summer camp.....

Click to expand...

Not exactly. They should play to win. Playing players who can win games. All we really need to do is quit playing JJ at power forward, and putting Mitchell there instead whenever Monroe or Drummond sits. JJ should start at small forward if Smith does not play. Singler should be let go.

At no point should Pope ever play small forward. Instead, try Mitchell there a bit when JJ needs a rest.

Instead of Jennings and Stuckey staying out there for the first 16 minutes of the game, mix it up a bit. Always try Stuckey at point a bit in a game to see what he can do, with an actual shooting guard along side him, like Pope.

Great comeback loss. It looked bad for a while but the Pistons put together a weak second half to pull this one out. I watched the Bull's broadcast of this one and they were impressed with Andre and his future in this League. They also couldn't believe how few assists the Pistons had and the horrible shot selection by Siva and KCP near the end. The Bulls played team basketball and the Pistons just had Stuckey and Jennings jacking up shot after shot.

Not exactly. They should play to win. Playing players who can win games. All we really need to do is quit playing JJ at power forward, and putting Mitchell there instead whenever Monroe or Drummond sits. JJ should start at small forward if Smith does not play. Singler should be let go..

Click to expand...

Agree every team should always play to win.....but this the NBA where the weak get better when they luck upon the key young player that helps them get into positions to contend for championship. Sometime between the 40th and the 60th game of the season, it was apparent between Gores and the fan base that this team was having issues even contending for a playoff spot, let alone a championship. Once it became apparent that even the interim coach could not motivate and lead them to even a playoff spot that for almost 2 weeks they were only 3 games short of securing, the hidden goal (read tank) was to put up a fight but lose just enough to put them in position for a possible draft pick as oppose to ending the season with no playoff or draft pick. I still cheered for a win in every game they played this season, but once it appeared that the playoffs were a reach, me and few other long time Pistons fans looked the other way and said if we lose, so be it....the goal was the pick.....which theoretically they are now in position to get.

We can all blame Joe for putting the team in this position, and the owner for having the quick hook on Cheeks. I still think we would have overcome the adversities and made the playoffs with Cheeks still at the helm. The way the Pacers have been playing...a first round upset is a possibility for any 7 or 8 seed that gets a chance at them.

Hopefully the new coach will have some sense and play the players at their positions and have the right personnel in place to finally get the team to contend for post season next season.

Agree every team should always play to win.....but this the NBA where the weak get better when they luck upon the key young player that helps them get into positions to contend for championship. Sometime between the 40th and the 60th game of the season, it was apparent between Gores and the fan base that this team was having issues even contending for a playoff spot, let alone a championship. Once it became apparent that even the interim coach could not motivate and lead them to even a playoff spot that for almost 2 weeks they were only 3 games short of securing, the hidden goal (read tank) was to put up a fight but lose just enough to put them in position for a possible draft pick as oppose to ending the season with no playoff or draft pick. I still cheered for a win in every game they played this season, but once it appeared that the playoffs were a reach, me and few other long time Pistons fans looked the other way and said if we lose, so be it....the goal was the pick.....which theoretically they are now in position to get.

We can all blame Joe for putting the team in this position, and the owner for having the quick hook on Cheeks. I still think we would have overcome the adversities and made the playoffs with Cheeks still at the helm. The way the Pacers have been playing...a first round upset is a possibility for any 7 or 8 seed that gets a chance at them.

Hopefully the new coach will have some sense and play the players at their positions and have the right personnel in place to finally get the team to contend for post season next season.

Click to expand...

Can not agree really. I believe the team has the players to make a very good shot at winning it all. They were just not played. Instead, we got Singler foisted on us way too much, Bynum foisted on us way too much. When JJ finally started getting some playing time, it was around 2 to 1 out of position at power forward. Mitchell never played. Stuckey was never given a try at the backup point guard slot. Not one trade was made, not even a ten day player at any point in an attempt to improve the roster. A total disaster of a season with no effort ever to improve the team once the season started. Instead, we basically had an owner, GM, and on down who just stuck their heads in the sand. I say if possible, let them all go. I am cheering more right now for the owner to either A) Apologise to the fan base for letting all the above happen, or B) Sell the team.

The reason that draft picks are so valuable is because the salaries that you have to pay the top picks are WAY less than the value that you get for them. About half way through the first round, that discount goes away and guys tend to make about what they deserve. i.e. the pay scale is flawed. Adjusting the rookie pay scale to match the historic performance for each draft position might eliminate the incentive to tank. Teams should be forced to pay their draft pick an amount that loosely correlates to what that player would go for if they were a free agent.

Here is the current pay scale for the first year:

$4.6

$4.1

$3.7

$3.3

$3.0

$2.7

$2.5

$2.3

$2.1

$2.0

Imagine if it were more like this:

$12.0

$10.0

$8.0

$7.0

$6.0

$5.5

$5.0

$4.5

$4.0

$3.75

Scaling more accurately and with a more exponential reward for top players might also incentivize players to stay in college an extra year or two. If you move your stock from 10th in the draft to 3rd for instance by staying an extra year, you will make way more money on your rookie contract, even with the year in college with $0.

As far as the tanking, it would make it so that a top pick is less of a gift and more of just an opportunity for force a good player to play for your franchise, when they might not if they were a free agent (for example, if you are picking first, your team obviously stinks and this would free you from the death spiral where nobody will sign with you).

The reason that draft picks are so valuable is because the salaries that you have to pay the top picks are WAY less than the value that you get for them. About half way through the first round, that discount goes away and guys tend to make about what they deserve. i.e. the pay scale is flawed. Adjusting the rookie pay scale to match the historic performance for each draft position might eliminate the incentive to tank. Teams should be forced to pay their draft pick an amount that loosely correlates to what that player would go for if they were a free agent.

Here is the current pay scale for the first year:

$4.6

$4.1

$3.7

$3.3

$3.0

$2.7

$2.5

$2.3

$2.1

$2.0

Imagine if it were more like this:

$12.0

$10.0

$8.0

$7.0

$6.0

$5.5

$5.0

$4.5

$4.0

$3.75

Scaling more accurately and with a more exponential reward for top players might also incentivize players to stay in college an extra year or two. If you move your stock from 10th in the draft to 3rd for instance by staying an extra year, you will make way more money on your rookie contract, even with the year in college with $0.

As far as the tanking, it would make it so that a top pick is less of a gift and more of just an opportunity for force a good player to play for your franchise, when they might not if they were a free agent (for example, if you are picking first, your team obviously stinks and this would free you from the death spiral where nobody will sign with you).

Click to expand...

Nobody has time for your 'facts' and 'reasonable theories' TaS.

The payscale is skewed because Kyle Singler screwed up the negotiations for the last CBA

You think the owners would willingly pay "market" value to the rookies after all these years?

Click to expand...

Over time, they should favor it (when the bloated contracts to the older guys burn off) and the better teams should strongly favor it since they don't benefit from having top picks very often.

A team only gets so much in revenues and they are only willing to pay so much in total salaries. They would rather have the salaries match the performance rather than the way that it currently is, where guys like Dre are great deals, but where guys like Ben Gordon, Charlie Villanueva, and countless others get bid up. It's just a question of how they are allocated. Having them match performance would make them easier to trade and would produce a more exciting trade market.

Over time, they should favor it (when the bloated contracts to the older guys burn off) and the better teams should strongly favor it since they don't benefit from having top picks very often.

A team only gets so much in revenues and they are only willing to pay so much in total salaries. They would rather have the salaries match the performance rather than the way that it currently is, where guys like Dre are great deals, but where guys like Ben Gordon, Charlie Villanueva, and countless others get bid up. It's just a question of how they are allocated. Having them match performance would make them easier to trade and would produce a more exciting trade market.

Click to expand...

But they'd still have the bloated B and CG contracts, wouldn't they? This doesn't deter that necessarily, it just pays rookies more.

It would be nice if they could reward well run teams somehow. It's so subjective though.

Can not agree really. I believe the team has the players to make a very good shot at winning it all. They were just not played. Instead, we got Singler foisted on us way too much, Bynum foisted on us way too much. When JJ finally started getting some playing time, it was around 2 to 1 out of position at power forward. Mitchell never played. Stuckey was never given a try at the backup point guard slot. Not one trade was made, not even a ten day player at any point in an attempt to improve the roster. A total disaster of a season with no effort ever to improve the team once the season started. Instead, we basically had an owner, GM, and on down who just stuck their heads in the sand. I say if possible, let them all go. I am cheering more right now for the owner to either A) Apologise to the fan base for letting all the above happen, or B) Sell the team.

Click to expand...

I think it's strange that you believe this team has the talent to win it all, but yet you constantly and consistently hate on the players.

The reason that draft picks are so valuable is because the salaries that you have to pay the top picks are WAY less than the value that you get for them. About half way through the first round, that discount goes away and guys tend to make about what they deserve. i.e. the pay scale is flawed. Adjusting the rookie pay scale to match the historic performance for each draft position might eliminate the incentive to tank. Teams should be forced to pay their draft pick an amount that loosely correlates to what that player would go for if they were a free agent.

Here is the current pay scale for the first year:

$4.6

$4.1

$3.7

$3.3

$3.0

$2.7

$2.5

$2.3

$2.1

$2.0

Imagine if it were more like this:

$12.0

$10.0

$8.0

$7.0

$6.0

$5.5

$5.0

$4.5

$4.0

$3.75

Scaling more accurately and with a more exponential reward for top players might also incentivize players to stay in college an extra year or two. If you move your stock from 10th in the draft to 3rd for instance by staying an extra year, you will make way more money on your rookie contract, even with the year in college with $0.

As far as the tanking, it would make it so that a top pick is less of a gift and more of just an opportunity for force a good player to play for your franchise, when they might not if they were a free agent (for example, if you are picking first, your team obviously stinks and this would free you from the death spiral where nobody will sign with you).

Click to expand...

There are reasons the NBA would not accept such an idea.
To Hades with them, as this is an outstanding idea.
Nice post TaS..........

I have no idea what league Lee thinks this team can win it all. Maybe the WNBA? nah, that's disrespectful to the ladies. Not sure the Pistons would make the WNBA playoffs.

How are they going to make the Finals? Playing Pope "Hope for a shot to go in"? Tony Don't call me Braxton Mitchell, a guy who has played all of what, 66 NBA minutes?

Peyton .318 shooting, 2:1 assist to turnover ratio Siva?

Our talent is not good. Not even close to the better teams in the league, but if you spend your time watching Orlando and Milwaukee, ok, I can understand how someone can convince themselves that the Pistons are playoff caliber. All it requires is never watching Miami, San Antonio, or the Clippers play and some really strong beverages.

But seriously, with decent coaching, a system in place, we might have been able to squeak into the playoffs with this roster. That's why this pick is so crucial. Without it, and with limited money to play in FA (presuming we don't let Monroe walk) there doesn't look like a lot of hope on the horizon for the Pistons. The scary thing about Joe leaving, is that a new GM might need at least 2 seasons to get things turned around if we lose this pick.